The black hole. Intellectual Property Rights Legislation (IPR) and Data Exchange Agreement (DEA) for Europeana

All IPR (and not only copyrights) are very important for museums when they give access to their collections, objects and object information on the internet.

This is important for the different websites of the museums themselves, but also for regional/national databases (as http://www.museuminzicht.be and http://www.erfgoedplus.be in Belgium) and even European projects (www.europeana.eu, EuropeanaLocal (Annette and I told you about that project, last EMAC in Helsinki sprak), Athena, Hope, …).

Of course the regulation of IPR is part of the national legislation and divers from country to country. Maybe this will change as Europe is giving more and more instructions to adapt national laws to more conformity in Europe.

But until now, the new legislation (for example about orphan works) is not favorable neither for cultural heritage organizations or the public.

Goals: to discuss with you which problems concerns us and to look for a strategy how to resolve them.

IPR are an important matter for museums when their collections, objects and information are accessible on internet. This is important for the database on the website of the museum as such, as well as regional/national websites (as http://www.museuminzicht.be and http://www.erfgoedplus.be in Belgium) and even European projects (www.europeana.eu, EuropeanaLocal (Annette and I told you about that project, last EMAC in Helsinki), Athena, Hope, …).

Of course the regulation of IPR is part of the national legislation and different from country to country. Maybe this will change as more and more uniformity is encouraged by Europe.

For now, current legislation (for example about orphan works: works where the author is not known) is not favorable neither for cultural heritage organizations nor the public.

I will not present the different laws, as I’m not a lawyer and Intellectual Property Rights are very complex and it doesn’t get any simpler.

My aim is to discuss with you which problems concern us all and to look for a strategy how to solve them. So my contribution to EMAC 2012 will be about:

  1. Difference in dealing with the existing laws throughout Europe.
  2. Museums, cultural heritage institutions and cultural heritage communities are often not well organized to influence national legislation unlike the collective rights management organizations (CRMO) who are very well organized to lobby.

Why would we like to adapt the existing laws?

  1. In the field of cultural heritage are different subsectors, with different needs and interests.
  2. Europeana and the DEA (Data Exchange Agreement).

IPR are an important matter for museums when their collections, objects and information are accessible on internet. This is important for the database on the website of the museum as such, as well as regional/national websites (as http://www.museuminzicht.be and http://www.erfgoedplus.be in Belgium) and even European projects (www.europeana.eu, EuropeanaLocal (Annette and I told you about that project, last EMAC in Helsinki), Athena, Hope, …).

Of course the regulation of IPR is part of the national legislation and different from country to country. Maybe this will change as more and more uniformity is encouraged by Europe.

For now, current legislation (for example about orphan works: works where the author is not known) is not favorable neither for cultural heritage organizations nor the public.

I will not present the different laws, as I’m not a lawyer and Intellectual Property Rights are very complex and it doesn’t get any simpler.

My aim is to discuss with you which problems concern us all and to look for a strategy how to solve them. So my contribution to EMAC 2012 will be about:

  1. Difference in dealing with the existing laws throughout Europe.
  2. Museums, cultural heritage institutions and cultural heritage communities are often not well organized to influence national legislation unlike the collective rights management organizations (CRMO) who are very well organized to lobby.

Why would we like to adapt the existing laws?

  1. In the field of cultural heritage are different subsectors, with different needs and interests.
  2. Europeana and the DEA (Data Exchange Agreement).

Presentation

Mieke Van Doorselaer, Belgium

Museum Advisor

mieke.van.doorselaer@oost-vlaanderen.be


Bio

1958, historian. Museum advisor (generalist) for the Province of East Flanders, a regional government in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, since September 1998.


Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s